Citation Nr: 22018351 Decision Date: 03/29/22 Archive Date: 03/29/22 DOCKET NO. 18-54 808 DATE: March 29, 2022 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for left upper extremity neuropathy is denied. Entitlement to service connection for right upper extremity neuropathy is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that the Veteran has had left upper extremity neuropathy at any time during or approximate to the pendency of the claim. 2. The evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that the Veteran has had right upper extremity neuropathy at any time during or approximate to the pendency of the claim. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for left upper extremity neuropathy are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 2. The criteria for service connection for right upper extremity neuropathy are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from June 1966 to April 1970. These matters come before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2015 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In October 2021, the Veteran testified at a virtual hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A copy of the transcript is associated with the evidentiary record. Following the hearing, at the Veteran's request, the record remained open for 90 days for submission of additional evidence. Evidence was added to the record by VA after the November 2018 statement of the case. This additional evidence includes December 2021 discharge summary related to the Veteran's left knee osteoarthritis, which is not material to the claim on appeal. Additionally, an October 7, 2021 discharge summary added to the record notes a hypoglycemic incident secondary to the Veteran's diabetic medication. This is not material to the Veteran's claim for entitlement to service connection for left upper extremity neuropathy and right upper extremity neuropathy as it is already established that the Veteran has a disability of diabetes for which he is service connected. Finally, VA treatment records added in or about November 2018 are duplicative of evidence already present in the record at the time of the statement of the case. Accordingly, a waiver or remand to the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) for consideration of this evidence is not warranted. Service Connection Legal Criteria Generally, to establish a right to compensation for a present disability a veteran must show: (1) a present disability; (2) an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Service connection may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). Analysis 1. Entitlement to service connection for left upper extremity neuropathy. 2. Entitlement to service connection for right upper extremity neuropathy. The Veteran contends that he is entitled to service connection for left upper extremity neuropathy and right upper extremity neuropathy to include as secondary to his service-connected diabetes mellitus. At the October 2021 Board hearing, the Veteran testified that he began experiencing symptoms of discomfort and burning sensation in his bilateral upper extremities approximately five or six years ago. The Veteran testified that he had not reported the symptoms to his doctors. He also asserted that his symptoms do not impact his motor skills; he does not have any difficulty with dropping items or not being able to pick up items. While the Veteran has testified to symptoms of upper extremity numbness, tingling and discomfort, he lacks the medical knowledge necessary to diagnose himself with neuropathy. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. Moreover, the medical evidence of record does not indicate that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of upper extremity neuropathy. In fact, during VA examinations for neuropathy in January 2015 and April 2018 the Veteran is noted to have diabetic peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral lower extremities, however there was no evidence of left upper extremity neuropathy or right upper extremity neuropathy. During both examinations there was no evidence of either constant pain, intermittent pain, paresthesias or numbness of the upper extremities. Subsequent treatment records do not note complaints of or diagnosis for upper extremity neuropathy. Moreover, following his Board hearing the Veteran was afforded an additional 90 days to submit evidence to support a current diagnosis of upper extremity neuropathy, no such evidence was received from the Veteran. The Board notes that pain can constitute a disability if it results in functional impairment. Saunders v. Wilkie, 886 F.3d 1356 (2018). However, in the instant case there is no evidence of functional impairment. The Veteran testified that his symptoms do not impair his motor skills, do not result in him dropping things and do not affect his ability to pick up things. Similarly, the medical evidence of record does not note any functional impairment related to upper extremity neuropathy or symptoms of upper extremity tingling, numbness, burning or discomfort. Ultimately the record does not substantiate that the Veteran has had a current disability of upper extremity neuropathy at any time during the pendency of the appeal. Additionally, there is no opinion to support that the Veteran's reported symptoms of tingling, numbness, burning, and discomfort are related to military service or secondary to a service-connected disability. Entitlement to service connection for upper extremity neuropathy is not established. Entitlement ot service connection for left upper extremity neuropathy is denied. Entitlement to service connection for right upper extremity neuropathy is denied. Jennifer White Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Wimbish, Associate Counsel The Board's decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.